> but the broad strokes are known. I’ve rarely seen any broad brush stroke other than ‘guns’ being blamed. 2) people don't like the answers Don’t they? Or d

> but the broad strokes are known. I’ve rarely seen any broad brush stroke other than ‘guns’ being blamed. 2) people don't like the answers Don’t they? Or do they simply not agree with the answers. Social science results are in fact very weak, as is constantly being shown. That is because it’s hard to do social science and the disciplines are relatively new. The way to improve this is not to pretend social science is better than it is, nor is it to ignore social science altogether, but to recognize its shortcomings and critique it. Also, your account is only 12 days old. I don’t think that is long enough to determine what is ‘accursed’ on HN. HN goes through trends and shifts over time. > 3) we aren't willing to solve the problem anyway so why proselytize it? Are we not? So we give up and to do something unrelated, in the name of solving the problem? That seems even worse. It doesn’t seem like we’re going to get rid of guns, so we may as well proselytize the real solutions.